Fox regular Jonathan Hoenig is supposed to be a business expert. But yesterday, he played the role of a public health expert, fear mongered about mandatory vaccinations and came up with a dubious prescription to protect public health.

FoxNews.com describes the Cashin’ In show by saying it “tells you what you need to know to make your money grow and keep what you already have.” How the subject of making child vaccines fits into that is a mystery.

Host Eric Bolling introduced the subject by saying, “Mandatory is the word.”

Hoenig runs a hedge fund and seems to have no medical or public health qualifications whatsoever. Hoenig’s answer, however, might have made people sick.

HOENIG: Absolute force. Vaccines, immunizations, Eric, in my opinion - should never be forced, never be required by government, even for the so-called public good. Think about where this could lead if government gets involved in science and medicine. Forced sterilizations, forced abortion. …If someone has mumps, if someone’s contagious, then they should be forcibly quarantined by government because they are a risk to the public at large.

Nobody else on the panel seemed to have any medical credentials, either.

Nomiki Konst seems to be an expert in communication. She did a pretty darned good job arguing against Hoenig. Konst said, “It pretty much is mandatory in all states in a way that 48 out of 50 states, excluding West Virginia and Mississippi, have mandatory vaccination for students who want to enter the public school system. …This should absolutely be mandatory because the problem here is there’s the right of the individual, and then there’s the right of the public, and public health is the largest right. Your individual exclusion from this vaccination impedes on everybody else’s health.”

Konst also called Hoenig’s quarantine idea “crazy.” And it looks like doctors would agree – because according to WebMD, you can have measles, i.e. be infectious, and not know it yet.

Besides quarantining, Hoenig advocated for businesses to take over the job of enforcing vaccinations. “Think about how this problem would be solved in a free society where private schools would perhaps require folks to have immunizations,” he said. “The airlines, restaurants would require that. That’s a big difference than government forcing you.” How many restaurant owners want to take over the job of checking immunization records? Probably just as many as there are customers wanting them to assume that responsibility.

Konst shot back, “This is not a libertarian issue. It’s an issue of public health. The government has the obligation to protect its citizens. …Once that child is affected, it can become an outbreak.”

Hoenig then argued that infected people “should be quarantined, should be separated by force.”

”By the government?” Konst asked.

”Yeah, force in this country,” said Hoenig.

”Oh, you like that kind of force but not like the other kind of force,” Konst said.

Anyone who can read and understand historical statistics will never subject their children to measles, mumps or Rubella. Contraindications from the vaccine are one per one million and it’s usually redness and pain at the injection site. Deaths from contracting measles is one per one thousand. Ear infections which may cause deafness is 20%, encephalitis is 10%, pnuemonia (which kills the most children) is 20%. & pregnant mother with Rubella has a huge chance of having a baby with birth defects, that is if it’s not miscarried. If people are too brain damaged to understand this, they may have had complications from measles.

Righteous ignorance.
Certain vaccinations/drugs can have adverse effects on an individual. Allergies exist after-all. Her approach was utilitarian in that she would be willing to sacrifice those with adverse reactions to a vaccination for the sake of the greater good. Jonathan’s solution of quarantine/isolation solves the same problem but without putting the individual at risk. A quarantine could be establish to allow for time to develop a vaccine that does not cause harm. Of course both approaches use force, we are removing a public threat who is not volunteering to remove himself. However, Jonathan’s approach leaves the most possible choice to the individual.
Jonathan 1 – 0 Nicky. ﻿